·First Treatise: "primarily a polemic against, and a
duel of scriptural interpretation with, the works of Robert Filmer"
(Simmons, p.460) -- especially Patriarcha (1680), in which Filmer
defended a divine right account of political authority (consistent with the
Stuart monarchs' view of themselves, especially James I).

·The Second Treatise: Of Civil Government (1690 -- two
years after the removal of James II from the throne of England during the
Glorious Revolution, but written before that event -- part of this work
concerns rebellion against existing political authority; Locke was in fact in favor
of the revolutionary overthrow of James II)

·Locke sums up his arguments against Filmer's divine right theory
in ch.1 of the Second Treatise (Cahn p.465). In effect, he begins this
work having rejected a potential answer to Q2 (What justifies political
society, i.e. what is the source of political authorityN?)-- the
answer he's rejected is: divine authority.

Locke argued for limited
government and toleration of different views and lifestyles -- so
Locke is one of the founders of the tradition of political liberalism --
(in the broadest sense: the political viewpoint that values individual liberty/freedom.)

In the tradition that
follows from Locke, individual freedom is thought to be most threatened by the
intrusion of government; so a Lockean liberal advocates limited government.
[In this tradition, we'll soon come across the John Stuart Mill of "On
Liberty," as well as Robert Nozick.]

There is, however,
another tradition of liberalism that stems from Jean Jacques Rousseau
(French, 1712-1778) that takes the greatest threat to personal freedom to be unjust
distribution of resources and opportunity. According to this tradition, if
you are poverty-stricken, or if you are living in a social system that favors
some individuals or classes at the expense of others, then you are not free in
any meaningful sense. So rather than advocating limited government, this
tradition advocates government intervention to reduce poverty and right
other social injustices. [In this tradition, we'll soon come across John
Rawls -- but note that the John Stuart Mill of Utilitarianism gravitates
towards this tradition.]

[1.3.] General Points
About Locke's Political Philosophy

·political authority is based on popular consent

·the polity is an artificial construction the purpose of
which is to serve the interests of its constituents, more specifically, to
secure the peace and security of its constituents so that they can pursue their
own private endeavors, to protect their rights to life, liberty, property and
health

·individuals can live their private lives as they see fit, so
long as they are obeying the law of nature (which is revealed by reason and
derived from God)

·the products of one's own labor are one's own property

The first question
Locke addresses in the Second Treatise: what is the "original"
(source) of political power? By "political power," Locke means:

a right of making laws and penalties of death,
and consequently all less penalties for the regulating and preserving of
property, and of employing the force of the community, in the execution of such
laws, and in the defence of the commonwealth from foreign injury; and all this
only for the public good. (I:3, p.461)

This definition of
political power implies two interesting things:

1.Locke (like Plato, Aristotle and Hobbes) is interested in the source of normative
political authority (authorityN) -- he want to know how a ruler
gains the right of making laws, etc...

2.He assumes that, whatever the origin of political authorityN,
it has its limits -- it is exercised only for the public good (unlike
Hobbes, who tried to argue that once a sovereign has authorityN, he
retains it even if he's not acting in the interest of the people).